Region 3- Voting Results on the Relative Importance of the Barrier Generated by the participants at the Region 3 CoLab in September 2010, at Allegan Area ESA
Triggering Question: "What are barriers for your region to what "ought to be done" to create a sustainable model of assistive technology to support students in accessing and progressing in the general education curriculum?"
6: (16 Votes) LACK OF FORMALIZED APPROACH TO IMPLEMENTING TECH INTO THE CLASSROOM 16: (15 Votes) LACK OF PD FOR ALL STAFF - GEN ED AND SPEC ED - IN ASSISTIVE TECH 21: (11 Votes) LACK OF A DATA COLLECTION SYSTEM TO ASSESS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSISTIVE TECH 14: (10 Votes) UNDERSTANDING ASSISTIVE TECH IS A TOOL TO ENGAGE STUDENT PARTICIPATION 22: (9 Votes) STAFF FEELING OVERWHELMED WITH NEW REQUIREMENTS AND EXPECTATIONS 18: (8 Votes) INSUFFICIENT FUNDS FOR ASSISTIVE TECH DEVICES AND ESPECIALLY FOR PD/TRAINING ON THE DEVICE 33: (6 Votes) THE INADEQUACIES OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF TECH AVAILABLE IN SOME SCHOOLS 11: (4 Votes) IDENTIFYING STAKEHOLDERS TO IMPLEMENT A SUSTAINABLE MODEL 1: (3 Votes) A LACK OF VESTED INTEREST FROM ALL STAKEHOLDERS 2: (3 Votes) TIME TO IMPLEMENT TRAINING FOR STAFF, PARENTS, AND STUDENTS 35: (3 Votes) DIFFERENT VIEWS ON HOW MUCH ASSISTIVE TECH SHOULD BE PERMITTED FOR USE BY STUDENTS 7: (2 Votes) LACK OF COLLABORATION BETWEEN ASSISTIVE TECH CONSULTANTS AND CONSULTANTS FOR RTI AND THE CURRICULUM CONSULTANTS 8: (2 Votes) LACK OF A CONSISTENT PROCESS FOR IDENTIFYING AND DELIVERING ALTERNATIVE INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS 10: (2 Votes) THE PERPETUATION OF THE 'EXPERT' MODEL 29: (2 Votes) WE LACK TEAMS TO SUPPORT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ASSISTIVE TECH 3: (1 Votes) DIFFERING VIEWS OF A CHILD'S POTENTIAL 12: (1 Votes) DIFFERING VIEWS REGARDING THE LEVEL OF NEED/ EXPERTISE FOR ASSISTIVE TECH PERSONNEL 13: (1 Votes) NOT ENOUGH STAFF TO SUPPORT TECH 17: (1 Votes) WITHIN HIGHER EDUCATION GEN EDUCATORS MISUNDERSTANDING OR POTENTIALLY NEGATIVE PERCEPTIONS OF THE ROLE OF ASSISTIVE TECH 19: (1 Votes) LACK OF EXPOSURE TO DIFFERENT ASSISTIVE TECH DEVICES AND SYSTEMS 37: (1 Votes) THE TIME ELEMENT REQUIRED FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 48: (1 Votes) LACK OF STAFF'S EMPOWERMENT AND PASSION TO STATE THEIR WANTS AND NEEDS 54: (1 Votes) HIT AND RUN 55: (1 Votes) LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY OF GENERAL ED TEACHERS FOR SPECIAL ED STUDENTS AND THEIR DIFFERENTIATED NEEDS 4: (0 Votes) NO SENSE OF URGENCY 5: (0 Votes) MISUNDERSTANDING OR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE REGARDING DIFFERENTIATION AMONG STUDENT POPULATIONS 9: (0 Votes) [DELETE] LACK OF COLLABORATION TO ENSURE ONGOING EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSISTIVE TECH 15: (0 Votes) ACCESS TO TEACHING STAFF FOR PD 20: (0 Votes) THE TEACHERS UNWILLINGNESS TO ALLOW STUDENTS TO USE ASSISTIVE TECH DUE TO FAIRNESS ISSUE 23: (0 Votes) [DELETE] CONFLICT BETWEEN OLD SCHOOL AND NEW SCHOOL IDEAS ON HOW TO DELIVER CURRICULUM 24: (0 Votes) SOME INFLEXIBILITY BY STAFF BECAUSE ASSISTIVE TECH ADAPTATIONS MAY BE PERCEIVED AS MORE WORK 25: (0 Votes) THE DIFFICULTY IN DEALING WITH PARENTS WHO ARE INDIFFERENT TO TRAINING AND EDUCATION 26: (0 Votes) THE LACK OF ACCESSIBILITY TO QUALITY STUDENT LITERATURE AT THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL 27: (0 Votes) THE NEED FOR FOCUSED COLLABORATION 28: (0 Votes) LACK OF COLLABORATION WITH OUR STATES STANDARDIZED ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE ACCOMMODATIONS 30: (0 Votes) THE PRESENCE OF A DEFENSIVE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DISTRICTS AND FAMILIES 31: (0 Votes) LACK OF INCLUSION MODEL - WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND HOW IT IS SUPPORTED 32: (0 Votes) NO CLEAR PATH 34: (0 Votes) LIMITATIONS BY STATE AND FEDERAL USE OF FUNDS 36: (0 Votes) LACK OF ACTUAL IMPLEMENTATION AFTER TRAINING 38: (0 Votes) LIMITED USE OF ALTERNATIVE MODELS OF PD 39: (0 Votes) LACK OF AN ORGANIZED DATABASE FOR ACCESSIBLE CURRICULUM MATERIALS 40: (0 Votes) THE LACK OF PHYSICAL SPACE, TIME, AND FLEXIBILITY WITHIN SCHOOLS FOR EFFICIENT USE OF TECH 41: (0 Votes) INADEQUATE TRAINING OF PROVIDERS - SCHOOL TO HOME 42: (0 Votes) BURN-OUT 43: (0 Votes) MINIMAL USE OF A THOROUGH DECISION-MAKINNG PROCESS 44: (0 Votes) CONFLICT BETWEEN GEN ED AND SPECIAL ED 45: (0 Votes) FAILURE FOR ALL PLAYERS TO PLAY NICELY 46: (0 Votes) INADEQUATE LEVEL OF EVALUATION TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT 47: (0 Votes) NEGATIVE PERCEPTION BY OTHERS OR STIGMA BY STUDENTS THEMSELVES WHO NEED TO USE THE ASSISTIVE TECH IN GEN ED CLASSROOMS 49: (0 Votes) ABSENCE OF MENTORING RELATIONSHIPS 50: (0 Votes) POOR COMMUNICATION 51: (0 Votes) STAFF CHANGES 52: (0 Votes) PROCESS ORIENTED VS. CONTENT ORIENTED INSTRUCTION 53: (0 Votes) [DELETE] LACK OF AVAILABLE TECH
Region 3- Voting Results on the Relative Importance of the BarrierGenerated by the participants at the Region 3 CoLab in September 2010, at Allegan Area ESA
Triggering Question: "What are barriers for your region to what "ought to be done" to create a sustainable model of assistive technology to support students in accessing and progressing in the general education curriculum?"
6: (16 Votes) LACK OF FORMALIZED APPROACH TO IMPLEMENTING TECH INTO THE CLASSROOM
16: (15 Votes) LACK OF PD FOR ALL STAFF - GEN ED AND SPEC ED - IN ASSISTIVE TECH
21: (11 Votes) LACK OF A DATA COLLECTION SYSTEM TO ASSESS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSISTIVE TECH
14: (10 Votes) UNDERSTANDING ASSISTIVE TECH IS A TOOL TO ENGAGE STUDENT PARTICIPATION
22: (9 Votes) STAFF FEELING OVERWHELMED WITH NEW REQUIREMENTS AND EXPECTATIONS
18: (8 Votes) INSUFFICIENT FUNDS FOR ASSISTIVE TECH DEVICES AND ESPECIALLY FOR PD/TRAINING ON THE DEVICE
33: (6 Votes) THE INADEQUACIES OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF TECH AVAILABLE IN SOME SCHOOLS
11: (4 Votes) IDENTIFYING STAKEHOLDERS TO IMPLEMENT A SUSTAINABLE MODEL
1: (3 Votes) A LACK OF VESTED INTEREST FROM ALL STAKEHOLDERS
2: (3 Votes) TIME TO IMPLEMENT TRAINING FOR STAFF, PARENTS, AND STUDENTS
35: (3 Votes) DIFFERENT VIEWS ON HOW MUCH ASSISTIVE TECH SHOULD BE PERMITTED FOR USE BY STUDENTS
7: (2 Votes) LACK OF COLLABORATION BETWEEN ASSISTIVE TECH CONSULTANTS AND CONSULTANTS FOR RTI AND THE CURRICULUM CONSULTANTS
8: (2 Votes) LACK OF A CONSISTENT PROCESS FOR IDENTIFYING AND DELIVERING ALTERNATIVE INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
10: (2 Votes) THE PERPETUATION OF THE 'EXPERT' MODEL
29: (2 Votes) WE LACK TEAMS TO SUPPORT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ASSISTIVE TECH
3: (1 Votes) DIFFERING VIEWS OF A CHILD'S POTENTIAL
12: (1 Votes) DIFFERING VIEWS REGARDING THE LEVEL OF NEED/ EXPERTISE FOR ASSISTIVE TECH PERSONNEL
13: (1 Votes) NOT ENOUGH STAFF TO SUPPORT TECH
17: (1 Votes) WITHIN HIGHER EDUCATION GEN EDUCATORS MISUNDERSTANDING OR POTENTIALLY NEGATIVE PERCEPTIONS OF THE ROLE OF ASSISTIVE TECH
19: (1 Votes) LACK OF EXPOSURE TO DIFFERENT ASSISTIVE TECH DEVICES AND SYSTEMS
37: (1 Votes) THE TIME ELEMENT REQUIRED FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
48: (1 Votes) LACK OF STAFF'S EMPOWERMENT AND PASSION TO STATE THEIR WANTS AND NEEDS
54: (1 Votes) HIT AND RUN
55: (1 Votes) LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY OF GENERAL ED TEACHERS FOR SPECIAL ED STUDENTS AND THEIR DIFFERENTIATED NEEDS
4: (0 Votes) NO SENSE OF URGENCY
5: (0 Votes) MISUNDERSTANDING OR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE REGARDING DIFFERENTIATION AMONG STUDENT POPULATIONS
9: (0 Votes) [DELETE] LACK OF COLLABORATION TO ENSURE ONGOING EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSISTIVE TECH
15: (0 Votes) ACCESS TO TEACHING STAFF FOR PD
20: (0 Votes) THE TEACHERS UNWILLINGNESS TO ALLOW STUDENTS TO USE ASSISTIVE TECH DUE TO FAIRNESS ISSUE
23: (0 Votes) [DELETE] CONFLICT BETWEEN OLD SCHOOL AND NEW SCHOOL IDEAS ON HOW TO DELIVER CURRICULUM
24: (0 Votes) SOME INFLEXIBILITY BY STAFF BECAUSE ASSISTIVE TECH ADAPTATIONS MAY BE PERCEIVED AS MORE WORK
25: (0 Votes) THE DIFFICULTY IN DEALING WITH PARENTS WHO ARE INDIFFERENT TO TRAINING AND EDUCATION
26: (0 Votes) THE LACK OF ACCESSIBILITY TO QUALITY STUDENT LITERATURE AT THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL
27: (0 Votes) THE NEED FOR FOCUSED COLLABORATION
28: (0 Votes) LACK OF COLLABORATION WITH OUR STATES STANDARDIZED ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE ACCOMMODATIONS
30: (0 Votes) THE PRESENCE OF A DEFENSIVE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DISTRICTS AND FAMILIES
31: (0 Votes) LACK OF INCLUSION MODEL - WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND HOW IT IS SUPPORTED
32: (0 Votes) NO CLEAR PATH
34: (0 Votes) LIMITATIONS BY STATE AND FEDERAL USE OF FUNDS
36: (0 Votes) LACK OF ACTUAL IMPLEMENTATION AFTER TRAINING
38: (0 Votes) LIMITED USE OF ALTERNATIVE MODELS OF PD
39: (0 Votes) LACK OF AN ORGANIZED DATABASE FOR ACCESSIBLE CURRICULUM MATERIALS
40: (0 Votes) THE LACK OF PHYSICAL SPACE, TIME, AND FLEXIBILITY WITHIN SCHOOLS FOR EFFICIENT USE OF TECH
41: (0 Votes) INADEQUATE TRAINING OF PROVIDERS - SCHOOL TO HOME
42: (0 Votes) BURN-OUT
43: (0 Votes) MINIMAL USE OF A THOROUGH DECISION-MAKINNG PROCESS
44: (0 Votes) CONFLICT BETWEEN GEN ED AND SPECIAL ED
45: (0 Votes) FAILURE FOR ALL PLAYERS TO PLAY NICELY
46: (0 Votes) INADEQUATE LEVEL OF EVALUATION TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT
47: (0 Votes) NEGATIVE PERCEPTION BY OTHERS OR STIGMA BY STUDENTS THEMSELVES WHO NEED TO USE THE ASSISTIVE TECH IN GEN ED CLASSROOMS
49: (0 Votes) ABSENCE OF MENTORING RELATIONSHIPS
50: (0 Votes) POOR COMMUNICATION
51: (0 Votes) STAFF CHANGES
52: (0 Votes) PROCESS ORIENTED VS. CONTENT ORIENTED INSTRUCTION
53: (0 Votes) [DELETE] LACK OF AVAILABLE TECH
Total Votes Cast: 105